Linguistic relativity is a principle which obtains that the structure of a language influences the manner in which its speakers are capable of conceptualizing their world view (Gumperz and Levison 1996). The principle is based on the idea that language and thought are interconnected (Boas, 1911). There are several foundational ideals of the principle of which this paper discusses in summary.
One such ideal is the unconscious nature of language. This tenet holds that language constitutes automatic or second nature behavior. By this it is meant that we internalize the body of knowledge that our native language represents. Consequently, we abide by the workings of our language rather than pondering over and altering it. Another tenet is language acquisition. This contributes to the principle in the sense that we acquire our language at a tender age, an age where we do not understand or ponder over its complexities (Pourcel, 2005).
It is in these formative years that language provides a context for conceptualizing the world. Constant usage then results to cognitive internalization which we use in our lifetime. Psycholinguistic processing is another ideal. This makes reference to the neurological reactions and cognitive computations that take place when interacting with a language. Given that language is used from a tender age to conceptualize the world, such language contributes to the neurological architecture of the brain.
Consequently, language acquisition causes a long lasting neural architecture that aids in language processing in our entire lifetime. Frequency of usage is also another tenet. Language is the most used media of communication. Such high level of frequency of usage assists in explicating the foregoing properties of language. Another tenet is the Conventionalization of language. This obtains that a language has to be predictable since it is a necessary tool for humans.
As such it cannot be randomly altered or modified if it has to be used effectively. On such basis it is suggested that language acts as a functional device for social and individual cognition (Gyori 2000). Categorization in language constitutes another tenet. This highlights the fact that language is used to catalog information about the world. Such classifications are not uniform and each mirrors a distinct conceptual organization of information. Such organization has been argued to match to the idea of world view.
Another tenet is partial referentiality. By this it is meant that in every language only a fraction of a concept we have in mind is articulated. Each language determines the mental picture that is meant by the expression of the notion (Boas, 1966). Selective codability is another ideal. This ideal obtains that the manner in which languages lexicalise given domains and concepts vary. Thus concepts are readily preset in language to differing extents, which necessitates that they are easily accessed in perception to differing extents.
Cultural symbolism is another tenet. A Language contains symbolic meanings and cultural affinities that are understood only by its speaker. Only to those that speak it fathom its values and meanings. The last tenet is semantic specificity. As language is specific to those who understand it, it becomes intricate to translate it to another language without gain or loss of meaning. Consequently, the concepts being expressed may attract different perceptions. In conclusion therefore, it is safe to say that these tenets contribute to linguistic relativity.
Work Cited
Boas, F. Introduction to Handbook of American Indian Languages. Lincoln, NE: University of
Nebraska Press, (1966 [1911])
Gumperz, J. and Levison, S. (eds) Rethinking Linguistic Relativity Cambridge, MA: Cambridge
University Press. 1996.
Györi, G. Semantic change as linguistic interpretation of the world. In S. Niemeier & R. Dirven
(eds.) Evidence for Linguistic Relativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2000, 71-90.
Pourcel, S. Relativism in the Linguistic Representation & Cognitive Conceptualization of
Motion Events across Verb-Framed & Satellite-Framed Languages. Doctoral thesis, University of Durham, 2005.
